A mother and her 14-year-old daughter are advocating for better protections for victims after AI-generated nude images of the teen and other female classmates were circulated at a high school in New Jersey.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the country, officials are investigating an incident involving a teenage boy who allegedly used artificial intelligence to create and distribute similar images of other students – also teen girls - that attend a high school in suburban Seattle, Washington.

The disturbing cases have put a spotlight yet again on explicit AI-generated material that overwhelmingly harms women and children and is booming online at an unprecedented rate. According to an analysis by independent researcher Genevieve Oh that was shared with The Associated Press, more than 143,000 new deepfake videos were posted online this year, which surpasses every other year combined.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    571 year ago

    Right, there are plenty of reactive measures available but the only proactive measures are either restricting availability of the source photos used or restricting use of the deep fake tools used. Everything beyond that is trying to put the genie back in the bottle.

    • @interceder270
      link
      521 year ago

      At some point, communities and social circles need to be able to moderate themselves.

      Disseminating nudes of peers should be grounds for ostracizing, but it really depends on the quality of people around you.

      • @MotoAsh
        link
        191 year ago

        That doesn’t work. It’s nothing but an inconvenience to not talk to your neighbors or those around you. They’d just get even worse and make even worse friends online.

        Ostracization doesn’t work. Ever. Period. If they’re bad enough, banishment works. Ostracization is just literally ignoring the problem.

        • @interceder270
          link
          -21 year ago

          Ostracization doesn’t work. Ever. Period. If they’re bad enough, banishment works. Ostracization is just literally ignoring the problem.

          That’s just wrong. Unless you’re hanging around shitty people, ignoring the bad ones by definition works.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            A lot of social circles are dominated by either shitty people or by people too insecure to take a confronting attitude towards those shitty people.

          • @MotoAsh
            link
            21 year ago

            It works for you. It doesn’t work on a societal level.

            • @interceder270
              link
              01 year ago

              Yeah, it does. It’s literally how most friend groups keep undesirables from hanging out with them.

              • @MotoAsh
                link
                41 year ago

                Your friend group is not a sufficient model for all friend groups. They’re a fundamentally different set. All sets are not the same as the other, and taken as a whole it is fundamentally different than any individual group. I’m talking about all groups. Not your group.

                • @interceder270
                  link
                  21 year ago

                  I know. I’ve also said that “if the microcosm is so shitty that it doesn’t ostracize people who disseminate nudes, then the people in it deserve to suffer until they improve [or leave.]”

                  Not everyone is worth hanging around. I know it’s difficult to be alone and most people would rather have shitty ‘friends’ than be alone, but that doesn’t mean they won’t suffer from being around shitty people.

                  I think the answer is to take the power away from shitbags by avoiding them. The more people who do this, the less influence shitbags have.

                  • @MotoAsh
                    link
                    11 year ago

                    You seem to assume I’m taking the position of being polite to terrible people. Quite the opposite.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      301 year ago

      It’s not possible to restrict deep fake technology at this point. It’s out there. Accessible to everyone who wants it and has a computer at home.

    • @jimbo
      link
      9
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      deleted by creator

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        And that’s the point I was making, nobody can be “protected” from widely available photos being used on widely available programs. Best we can do is deter but that isn’t a guarantee.

    • cannache
      link
      fedilink
      -131 year ago

      Are we seriously going to try and use someone’s photos for dumb shit like this? Cone on, people just want something to wank to or someone to call over to have sex with, who the hell would actually do this?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        7
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Well evidently the answer to your last question is " some people". Your point would only make sense if all this was hypothetical